Talk:Hyrulean Civil War
Story Too much speculation and theories This article has too many theories mixed up with known facts. But not just that, the theories are marked as such and the mixing between speculation and known facts make the article less interesting. I suggest removing everything from the main section and making a new section for the theories. Benitoperezgal2 (talk) 19:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC) :I disagree, it makes for a good read and does a good job explaining several things. Just my opinion. 20:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC) ::While it may explain things, they aren't taken from any official source and it would be like reading fanfiction (a thing that many people don't like). That's why I'm telling the theory mixed with real facts makes the article less interesting. Benitoperezgal2 (talk) 17:34, 10 June 2009 (UTC) ::::Sorry if I sounded like I just wanted to discusse it first. iirc in the wikis you should ask first before making a big edit that will modify the entire article because many people could argue against you. Benitoperezgal2 (talk) 18:11, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Well I took action :). I removed many information as it was too repetitive, the narration was told 4 times (one in the introduction, then the supposed real one, then a theorical narrative and finally a theory. I just left the introduction and the real narrative moving the thoerical to User:Hero of Time 87/Theorical Narrative because he wrote it all according to this: http://zelda.wikia.com/index.php?title=Hyrulean_Civil_War&diff=45371&oldid=38675. The article itself still needs some references and the introduction can be better, I may fix it later. Benitoperezgal2 (talk) 21:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Updates to the Page After reading the above section of this talk page, it seems like the people here are a bit reluctant on changing information to this page...It certainly needs to be updated, especially since the information is a bit inaccurate, given the official timeline, and information in Hyrule Historia. Here are just a few things: There is no such thing as the "Hyrulean Civil War", so far (according to the official timeline) there have been four major wars in the series: The Ancient Battle, in which describes the battle between Hylia and Demise. The Interloper War, which happens between the games Skyward Sword and Minish Cap, describing the war between other races for the Triforce. The Hyrule Unification War, which was a short war in which Hyrule was expanding its kingdom and was ten years before the events of Ocarina of Time. The Sealing War, which happens in the beginning of the Decline Timeline, describing the Hylian Knights fighting to protect the Sages that were sealing the portal to the Dark World. Other than the conflicts that happen in games (Invasion of Twilight, ect), these four wars are the only major conflicts that happen, there is no Civil War. I suggest creating a page for each war, so as to avoid confusion from readers. If no one else will do it, tell me to and I will. Thank you for hearing my concern on the matter. Timelinesplitter (talk) 18:12, August 20, 2012 (UTC) :Well, see, the problem here is that for a long time we've been working under the assumption that the Interloper War and Hyrule Unification War were the same thing, which I've always considered a bit presumptuous (though logical). And although I would normally be opposed to taking the Hyrule Historia's word on this, to my knowledge we have no actual source suggesting that these two wars are the same, making the Hyrule Historia the highest form of canon available. We'll have to see what other people think before updating, though, since the HH is a bit of a controversial topic around here. ''Xykeb Yvolix '' 20:31, August 20, 2012 (UTC) ::I agree with Xykeb. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 21:02, August 20, 2012 (UTC) :::Why exactly is Hyrule Historia controversal around here? It is, quite literally, the bible of Zelda lore. There is nothing more accurate. I'm unsure how it could be argued against. But, I'll take your advice and wait. Thank you for your response. Timelinesplitter (talk) 23:41, August 20, 2012 (UTC) ::::Hyrule Historia is stupid. – Jazzi (talk) 23:44, August 20, 2012 (UTC) :::::The book itself declares that it is not absolutely conclusive, that the games' lore is second to their gameplay (implying that they didn't necessarily create the games with the Hyrule Historia's information in mind), and that things can change. Therefore, we're sticking to our old policy that the games are the highest form of canon possible, meaning that while Hyrule Historia is certainly a source of information it'll always take a backseat to what we actually see int he games. As for why it's controversial, there are certain things that the Hyrule Historia "confirmed" that we found either contrived or downright impossible. For example, unless Nintendo is using the word "reincarnation" entirely incorrectly, Kaepora Gaebora can't be an alternate form of Rauru, since an in-game Gossip Stone says that Kaepora is a reincarnation of a sage. ''Xykeb Yvolix '' 23:55, August 20, 2012 (UTC) ::::::I personally agree with your policy, as it does say that in the book. However, it's not impossible for the things explained in Hyrule Historia to be true, and in all honesty, just because you believe it to be so, does not mean it is so, Nintendo created their fantasy world, and not to be arrogant or to offend, but I believe they can do what they please...On the subject of Rauru and Kaepora Gaebora, Rauru is indeed a Sage, in case you did not know that...As for how Rauru and Keapora Gaebora exist at the same time, it is explained in Hyrule Historia that Rauru was alive during the Era of Chaos, long before the events of Ocarina of Time. Rauru built the new Temple of Time (presumably in place of the Sealed Temple of Skyward Sword) and sealed away the Triforce and the Sacred Realm, and trapped himself within it, as a security measure. Since Rauru would, at that point, be considered dead, since he no longer lived in the world, he uses his reincarnated form, Keapora Gaebora, to keep track of the many incarnated Heroes. By the way, Jazzi, whether you think it's stupid or not, is in fact, your opinion. However, that doesn't change the fact that it is the most accurate piece, aside from the games, for Zelda lore. While it can change over time, it is still true now. Why would this Wikia not expose that truth? Timelinesplitter (talk) 07:04, August 21, 2012 (UTC) Reincarnation is the rebirth of the soul in a different body. Rauru can't exist as a spirit and a living being at the same time under the common laws of reincarnation. But I don't really want to get into a debate about the nature of reincarnation or the validity of Hyrule Historia so I'm just going to go ahead and say that while I personally like to think the Interloper and Unification War are one and the same, even without Hyrule Historia saying they are different, there is no evidence to say they are the same. So we really should have had separate pages from day one. So in short I support splitting this page into three different back story events of three different games. Oni Link 11:45, August 21, 2012 (UTC) Oh, no, of course it's possible for the Hyrule Historia to have accurate information; I'm just saying that it's my tendency to doubt its word if there's any contradiction within the games. This is not one of those cases, so I'm definitely agreeing with you here. As for Rauru, what Oni said about reincarnation is basically what I was trying to say there. Rauru may not be "alive", per se, but what he's doing still isn't reincarnation in the traditional sense of the word. Anyway, yeah, this is something that should be done. ''Xykeb Yvolix '' 14:21, August 21, 2012 (UTC) Very true, it does somewhat disregard the basic teachings and term of reincarnation, but I suppose Nintendo explains it in their own way. In any case, like Oni Dark Link advised, I won't get into a debate about it. Other than that, I would like to thank you very much for hearing me out! Timelinesplitter (talk) 18:42, August 21, 2012 (UTC)